DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Local Election Pilot Schemes

Nick Raynsford: The Government are looking at many ways, including e-voting, to modernise our electoral system and to increase the opportunities that people have to vote. To test the robustness of the new options and to build public confidence in them, we are promoting an extensive programme of pilot innovations at local elections.
	In September we, in conjunction with the Electoral Commission and the Local Government Association, published a prospectus inviting applications from English and Welsh local authorities to apply to run electoral pilots at local elections in 2003. The closing date for applications to run pilots in the May 2003 local elections was 29 November 2002.
	I am pleased to announce that we have received 63 applications from authorities wishing to participate in this pilot round. Of these, 19 are proposing to hold e-voting trials, seven other applications include e-counting, and 37 involve all-postal ballots. Seven authorities propose testing other variations to the normal electoral process, including extensions to the voting hours.
	The May 2003 pilot applications cover nearly 6.8 million electors. In comparison, the May 2002 pilots covered 2.5 million electors.
	The level of interest and enthusiasm shown by authorities is very encouraging. The widespread readiness to pilot new and innovative approaches to holding elections will benefit voters by testing ways to make elections more straightforward and accessible. Our electoral pilot programme is an important step towards achieving our aim of an e-enabled general election post–2006.
	Following consultation with the independent Electoral Commission, we expect to announce our decision on which non e-voting pilots have been approved later this month, and the decision on the remainder by mid-January 2003.
	With this high level of interest shown by local authorities, our focus in the early part of 2003 will be on undertaking with the successful applicants the extensive groundwork necessary for them to hold their pilots. As a result, we do not anticipate giving approval to any requests for piloting at local authority by-elections that are to be held between 1 January and 31 March 2003.
	Outside that period, our general approach on local authority by-election pilots is that we would be minded to approve proposals, including e-voting, for pilots only in certain circumstances. These are when the proposals meet the standard criteria set out in our September 2002 prospectus and contain innovative features or are from authorities that had run pilots before and are seeking to apply the same scheme to another election. We will, of course, consider carefully any application that is made.
	In all cases, it is important for local authorities to make any application as early as possible given the tight timetable for by-elections. Local authorities may wish to submit outline proposals in advance of an application for a specific by-election.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Jobcentre Plus

Nick Brown: The Government are committed to rolling out the new Jobcentre Plus service between now and 2006. By spring 2003 we expect to have around a quarter of the network of offices providing the new Jobcentre Plus services.
	Despite having record levels of employment, we cannot afford to be complacent about our labour market performance, or about working with our partners to deliver opportunities to a wider group of people than ever before. I am pleased therefore to be able to provide the House with further details of our plans to introduce the Jobcentre Plus service across Great Britain between now and March 2006.
	Early planning for the next three years of the work programme is going well and I am now able to provide an indicative list of the remaining districts detailing in which financial year we expect those sites to be transformed.
	There is still much to do to develop the local service delivery plans for each district and to prepare the sites for final delivery of the new services. We must be satisfied that a new office provides an environment in which the remodelled service will work and which is safe for staff and customers.
	For these remaining sites, planning for delivery of the new services will be a locally driven process. As local plans begin to emerge, district managers will be involving local MPs and other local partners. District managers will be writing to local stakeholders to invite comments and seek views. A key priority for district managers is to ensure that the new services are developed and tailored to meet the needs of the community they serve.
	The following tables indicate when Jobcentre Plus plans to introduce the new Jobcentre Plus service into the remaining Jobcentre Plus districts. As detailed planning work is undertaken at district level, changes may be made to this schedule.
	
		
			 2003–04 (27 districts) District Region/Country  
		
		
			 Norfolk*~  Lothian and Borders* Cheshire and Warrington*  Halton & St. Helens*  North East London*  Dorset*~  Northumberland*~  Sussex*  Surrey*  Wakefield*~  Bedfordshire  Glasgow  Tayside  Lancashire West  Liverpool  Cumbria  Berkshire  Central London  West London  Cornwall  Tees  Valley  Cardiff &  Vale  North West Wales &  Powys  South Humber  North Yorkshire  Birmingham &  Solihull~  Northamptonshire East England  Scotland  North West  North West  London  South West  North East  South East  South East  Yorkshire & the Humber  East of England  Scotland  Scotland  North West  North West  North West  South East  London  London  South West  North East  Wales  Wales  Yorkshire & the Humber  Yorkshire & the Humber  West Midlands  East Midlands  
		
	
	Note:
	Districts marked* are planned to introduce the new service in the first half of 2003–04.
	All other districts are grouped by region/country; within each region/country the districts are listed in the planned order for roll-out.
	For example, looking at the districts in Yorkshire and the Humber in the 2003–04 table above; Wakefield is planned to introduce the new service in the first half of the year followed by South Humber and finally North Yorkshire.
	In districts marked ~ some work may begin in 2002-03.
	Roll-out in North East London District is split between 2002–03 and 2003–04.
	
		
			 2004–05 (24 districts) District Region/Country  
		
		
			 Hertfordshire Cambridgeshire Edinburgh Fife Lanarkshire Oldham and Rochdale Salford and Trafford Bolton & Bury Stockport and Tameside Wigan Kent South London South East London West of England City of Sunderland Eastern Valleys Swansea Bay Leeds Hull and East Riding Doncaster Hereford & Worcester Staffordshire Greater Nottingham North Nottinghamshire East England East England Scotland Scotland Scotland North West North West North West North West North West South East London London South West North East Wales Wales Yorkshire & the Humber Yorkshire & the Humber Yorkshire & the Humber West Midlands West Midlands East Midlands East Midlands  
		
	
	
		
			 2005–06 (15 districts) District Region/Country  
		
		
			 Forth Valley & Dumbarton Ayrshire, Dumfries & Galloway Highlands & Western Isles North London City & East London Gloucestershire Wiltshire County Durham Wrexham & North Wales Coast West Wales Barnsley & Rotherham Bradford Dudley and Sandwell Wolverhampton and Walsall Lincolnshire and Rutland Scotland Scotland Scotland London London South West South West North East Wales Wales Yorkshire & the Humber Yorkshire & the Humber West Midlands West Midlands East Midlands

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Sovereign Base Areas

Jack Straw: There has been very substantial progress on agreeing the relationship between the Sovereign Base Areas (SBAs) and the EU after Cyprus' accession. Our hope is that the final agreement will be in line with the policy set out in Baroness Symons' answer of 5 December 2001, that the SBAs should remain outside the EU but with some technical adjustments to ensure the continued smooth functioning of the relationship between Cyprus and the SBAs. To that end, a clearly defined and limited part of the acquis would apply to the SBAs. These arrangements would be compatible with the 1960 treaty of establishment and with the undertakings which we made at that time in relation to the SBAs. In order to give effect to these arrangements we intend to sign two memoranda of understanding, on implementation and on co-operation on asylum seekers.
	The final agreement should take the form of a protocol which will be part of the terms of Cyprus' accession. A Bill will be introduced to enable ratification of the enlargement accession treaty.

Biological Weapons Convention

Jack Straw: There was a successful outcome to the recent 5th review conference of the biological weapons convention in Geneva. The agreement that was reached there on a set of practical measures will now be the focus for active consideration by the international community. It was of crucial importance that there should be unanimous agreement on the way ahead in meeting the pervasive threat from biological warfare, particularly in light of the growing menace of international terrorism.
	The Green Paper on the threat from biological weapons, which I laid before the House in April this year, set out a range of practical measures that could be adopted for dealing with this issue. I was particularly glad to see that a number of the proposals in that Paper have been incorporated into the international programme of work that has been agreed for the next three years.
	The first round of meetings in 2003 will see discussion of penal legislation to bolster the prohibitions of the convention and also of stricter regulations on the handling of dangerous pathogens. In 2004 states parties will study ways of better responding to and investigating cases of alleged use of biological weapons, and suspicious outbreaks of disease. There will also be an examination of ways to strengthen the worldwide surveillance of disease as it affects humans, animals and plants. Finally, in 2005 there will be discussion, and I hope adoption, of a code of conduct for scientists working in this area.
	I believe it was vital that agreement on this programme should be reached by consensus among all states parties to the biological weapons convention. It was for this reason that we conducted extensive consultations throughout 2002 to try and establish a basis for compromise. Those efforts clearly bore fruit.
	The seriousness and immediacy with which all countries view the BW threat is evident from this outcome. The programme of work won unanimous approval from the United States, our EU Partners and other western countries as well as Russia, China and members of the non-aligned movement. This broad support is vital and will help ensure that the international community brings its full authority to promoting and taking effective action on the potential dangers posed by the proliferation of biological weapons.
	The United Kingdom has played a leading role in the search for ways of reinforcing the biological weapons convention. So this positive outcome to the review conference is all the more welcome. We will remain fully committed to seeing practical results emerge from this process which will help address an ever present threat both to international stability and the well being of humankind.

EU Enlargement (Free Movement of Persons)

Jack Straw: The Government have decided to extend to citizens of the new EU member states, from their accession on 1 May 2004, the full rights to work in the UK as enjoyed by existing EU citizens.
	Under the terms of the accession treaty, the new EU citizens will automatically have full free movement rights for all purposes other than work. But it is up to each member state to decide whether to extend working rights from accession. Ireland, the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Greece have already stated their intention to do this.
	We have made this decision because it is in the UK's interest. It will attract workers we need in key sectors. It will ensure they can work without restrictions and not be a burden on the public purse. It forms part of our managed migration agenda. It makes sense financially, as we can focus resources on the real immigration problems, rather than trying to stop EU citizens enjoying normal EU rights. And it makes sense for UK citizens. Already thousands work in the future member states under work permit systems. They and others will have full rights to work in the new member states, free of controls.
	The decision has been taken after careful analysis of successive independent studies which show that there is unlikely to be a large influx of workers to the UK after accession. Forthcoming research commissioned by the Home Office also suggests that the numbers that will migrate to the UK after accession will not be significant. This confirms the experience of Spanish and Portuguese accession when there were no major influxes. Indeed, the evidence is that emigrant workers return to their countries after they have joined the EU, thanks to the increased stability and prosperity which EU membership brings.
	We will provide safeguards. These will allow us to reintroduce restrictions in the event of an unexpected threat to a region or sector in our labour markets. This is the right thing to do. The citizens of the new member states should enjoy the same rights as British, French, German and other citizens within the EU. Enlargement will ensure stability on our continent: the EU was founded to anchor peace and stability in Europe and enlargement is spreading that stability across our continent. It will provide a boost to our prosperity, as have all previous enlargements. And enlargement will improve our environment and security as we will be able to work together to tackle such problems as pollution, drug trafficking and international crime within the enlarged Union.
	The UK has been a champion of enlargement from the start. We look forward to the conclusion of negotiations with 10 candidate countries this week in Copenhagen, and to welcoming them as equal citizens in the EU in 2004.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998

David Blunkett: Section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998 requires the Secretary of State to lay before both Houses of Parliament at least once in every 12 months a report on the working of the Act. The reporting requirement applies to the whole Act but, following the repeal of the terrorism provisions (sections 1–4) consequent on the coming into force of the Terrorism Act 2000, the conspiracy provisions (sections 5–7) are now the only extant provisions. They are unrelated to the anti-terrorism sections and their review is a free-standing exercise.
	Section 5 of the 1998 Act—which, by sections 6 and 7, is applied to Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively—provides that agreements in England and Wales to commit acts that would amount to criminal offences triable in a foreign jurisdiction can be tried as criminal conspiracies in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, though ordinarily there would not be jurisdiction to try them in the United Kingdom (UK). The purpose of the review of the conspiracy provisions is not so much to determine the extent to which the provisions remain necessary (which is the purpose of reviewing the terrorism provisions) as to assess how, and in what circumstances, they have been used.
	Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, who acts as reviewer of the conspiracy provisions of the 1998 Act, has made enquiries into the operation of those provisions and reported his findings to me on 22 August 2002. He found that there has to date been only one use of the provisions, in April 2001, in the case of Pravin Patel and others in the Leicester Crown court. The conspiracy in that case was to supply false UK passports in Gujarat, to facilitate illegal immigration into the UK and illegal tourist entry into the USA. Two of the eight defendants—who received sentences of 15 months' imprisonment suspended for two years and five years' imprisonment—were prosecuted under the provisions of the 1998 Act without which these offences would not have been triable in the UK. This case indicates a proper use of the Act on sound evidence and in the public interest; and that the legislation worked well for the purpose for which it was intended.
	On Lord Carlile's recommendation, I intend to abolish the requirement for annual review of the extant procedures of the 1998 Act when a legislative opportunity occurs. The terrorism provisions of the Act having been subsumed in the Terrorism Act 2000; there is little point in continuing to have a separate review of the remaining provisions, particularly when they are so rarely used, are not confined to terrorism and no other conspiracy or extra-territorial jurisdiction provisions are subject to such review.
	Lord Carlile's report has today been laid before Parliament and copies have been placed in the Library.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Baton Rounds Review

Paul Murphy: Today I have received a report on the military use of baton rounds in Northern Ireland from Jim McDonald, the independent assessor of military complaints procedures in Northern Ireland.
	I am grateful for this work, which has been carried out in addition to the assessor's statutory tasks, and look forward to considering his report in detail.
	I have placed a copy of the report in the Libraries of the House.

Oversight Commissioner's Report

Jane Kennedy: In his written statement in this House on 25 November, my right hon. Friend the Member for Torfaen (Mr. Murphy) reported on progress on the review of policing arrangements in Northern Ireland and looked forward to the Oversight Commissioner's forthcoming report.
	As it is being published today, in accordance with Section 68(4)(a) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000, 1 have today laid a copy of the Oversight Commissioner's third statutory report for the year 2002 before this House.